You can't ignore kinetic energy when you're trying to balance an energy equation, especially if one element is a rocket.

Also, energy is frame dependent. The lifted object gains E potential energy relative to the planet, and the planet gains E potential energy relative to the lifted object, but that doesn't mean there's 2E energy suddenly present. Rather, you put E energy into the planet+object system, and there are different ways to look at where that energy ended up.

(Just like with kinetic energy: If you and I each mass 1kg and have a relative velocity of 100m/s, then we could say that I have 5000J relative to you, and that you have 5000J relative to me, but that doesn't mean it took 10,000J to bring this state about in the first place.)

Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.---If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

Hey guys I have solved the problem from the previous page. Are you interested? Probably not. Well it's not a long story:

The problem was that mass near event horizon hanging on a very long wire, is lowered down 1 m, which results the released energy traveling up million meters along the wire. That kind of seems to require external energy, to move that energy that large distance against the force of gravity.

The solution is that the energy can move upwards all by itself, without losing any energy. And the reason for that is that that is how nature works. Seriously. After thinking a lot that occurred to me.